The discussion over transferring the regional office of the International Labour Organization (ILO) from Beirut to Doha is not a technical debate about costs or logistics. It is a fundamental test of how far the international community is willing to compromise its core values in exchange for budgetary convenience. Moving the headquarters of an agency meant to protect workers’ rights to a country accused for years of systematic exploiting migrant workers is not merely a short-sighted decision—it is a direct blow to the organization’s essence.
Qatar has indeed implemented certain reforms in recent years following the criticism it faced ahead of hosting the World Cup, but these steps do not alter the basic reality: Labor unions are banned, workers’ ability to change employers is restricted, working conditions in the construction sector are harsh, and freedom of criticism is nonexistent. In Doha, every meeting with workers requires government approval. This is not an environment in which a UN body tasked with ensuring that governments do not trample workers’ rights can operate.
Such a move would harm not only the ILO’s employees, who rightly fear for their independence, but would also send a dangerous message to countries in the region that international standards are flexible, and that one can violate them and still be rewarded with hosting an international oversight body. At a time when workers’ rights are under severe pressure across the Middle East, the ILO should be the exact opposite: the last line of defense and not a captive partner of regimes.
The organization’s right to preserve its independence is not an internal matter; it is a basic condition for its ability to protect those workers who have no voice. Any step that weakens this—especially a move to a country that restricts freedom of expression and association—is not reform but capitulation.
If the ILO truly seeks to strengthen its credibility and maintain its mandate, it must make clear that hosting its offices is not a political prize but rather a responsibility granted only to those states that respect the values on which the organization was built. Qatar, as of now, remains far from meeting this minimum requirement.
The discussion over transferring the regional office of the International Labour Organization (ILO) from Beirut to Doha is not a technical debate about costs or logistics. It is a fundamental test of how far the international community is willing to compromise its core values in exchange for budgetary convenience. Moving the headquarters of an agency meant to protect workers’ rights to a country accused for years of systematic exploiting migrant workers is not merely a short-sighted decision—it is a direct blow to the organization’s essence.
Qatar has indeed implemented certain reforms in recent years following the criticism it faced ahead of hosting the World Cup, but these steps do not alter the basic reality: Labor unions are banned, workers’ ability to change employers is restricted, working conditions in the construction sector are harsh, and freedom of criticism is nonexistent. In Doha, every meeting with workers requires government approval. This is not an environment in which a UN body tasked with ensuring that governments do not trample workers’ rights can operate.
Such a move would harm not only the ILO’s employees, who rightly fear for their independence, but would also send a dangerous message to countries in the region that international standards are flexible, and that one can violate them and still be rewarded with hosting an international oversight body. At a time when workers’ rights are under severe pressure across the Middle East, the ILO should be the exact opposite: the last line of defense and not a captive partner of regimes.
The organization’s right to preserve its independence is not an internal matter; it is a basic condition for its ability to protect those workers who have no voice. Any step that weakens this—especially a move to a country that restricts freedom of expression and association—is not reform but capitulation.
If the ILO truly seeks to strengthen its credibility and maintain its mandate, it must make clear that hosting its offices is not a political prize but rather a responsibility granted only to those states that respect the values on which the organization was built. Qatar, as of now, remains far from meeting this minimum requirement.